Comments by GSPhD

Page 1 of 1

Posted on October 2 at 11:46 p.m.

I am concerned that so many students believed they were misled. While attending classes I was told that the school was following a course that could lead to APA accreditation and was not promised that they would receive it by the time I graduated.

I'm also surprised that almost all of the comments are negative. I received the very best education at Pacifica Graduate Institute and was inspired by fellow students who were generally more talented than my classmates at an Ivy League school. I attended Pacifica because unlike most psychology graduate schools, it had a mission of teaching depth psychology and linked its teaching to the historic roots of the field that are still relevant. My professors there were dedicated, passionate and highly qualified and included several psychiatrists and training analysts. I felt well mentored there and graduated fully prepared to complete a postdoctoral fellowship at Kaiser Permanente.

Since my graduation APA accreditation has increasingly dominated the internship and job markets. This requirement excludes students from internships who are very capable of clinical work, many with prior masters level careers. Licensed clinicians with years of unblemished professional work are not considered for employment at places like the Veterans Administration.

The APA's dominance of the field homogenizes the requirements for licensure, over-riding diverse theoretical orientations. Depth psychological approaches are empirically validated. For this reason I resigned my membership in APA.